# The History of the German Section of the Theosophical Society 1902-1913

## GA 250 — 5 February 1905, Berlin

### 20. Protocol of the Extraordinary General Assembly of the German Theosophical Society (DTG)

Dr. Steiner: “Careful scrutiny of the lines along which we were moving showed me that it is necessary to contribute something to clarify the things that were suggested at the time. That is why I asked you to appear at this General Assembly. I would like to emphasize from the outset that it will not be a matter of somehow interpreting the steps that three members of the Executive Board felt compelled to take in such a way that they could be directed against anyone, even remotely. The aim is to clarify the situation by means of a full clarification that cannot be achieved in any other way. In order to make this completely clear, I must still refer to a few words on the essentials, to the history of the Theosophical movement since the founding of the German section, namely insofar as it concerns members of the board, who come into consideration above all.

When the German Section was to be founded, the leaders of the Theosophical movement, insofar as they belonged to the Adyar Society, were to be persuaded to hand over the leadership to others. The personalities involved in the continuation of the theosophical work were Fräulein von Sivers and I. I myself was not yet ready to join the Theosophical Society, even a few months before I was called upon to contribute not only to the Berlin group but also to the entire movement of the Theosophical Society in my capacity as General Secretary of the German Section. I had already given lectures for two winters, in the Berlin branch. Two courses that have been printed, so that I am connected with the Theosophical Society in Berlin in a certain respect, am connected only personally.

When Count and Countess von Brockdorff left Berlin, I had already been a member of the Theosophical Society for several months, and when other measures failed, I was designated as General Secretary. I did not oppose the request at the time. I had no merit in the Theosophical Society at the time.

Berlin was considered a kind of center in Germany. Berlin was to become a kind of parent company. The German Theosophical Society (DTG) was built on this. The aim was to run the society from Berlin. At that time, Count and Countess Brockdorff went to great lengths to recruit Fräulein von Sivers, who was in Bologna, for their Berlin lodge. Even after she had been asked, she was not at all inclined to accept. Only when the leaders of the Theosophical Society deemed it necessary did Miss von Sivers decide to go to Berlin and lead the Theosophical movement with me under the conditions that were possible at the time.

We adapted ourselves to the circumstances in an absolutely conservative way. The circumstances naturally required that we take the initiative of the German movement into our own hands and try to bring the intentions to fruition in the right way. The situation in Germany was such that it would not have been possible at that time without initiative in a material sense. In addition to this material theosophical work, there were many other things, such as, for example, the management of the library, which was in a loose connection with the German Theosophical Society, the later Berlin branch of the Theosophical Society. This management of the library naturally required a certain amount of work, which had to be done between classes. The actual Theosophical work could only be done in the free breaks. I myself could devote myself to these library matters only in an advisory capacity. I had more important things to do. Besides, for two years I had been able to study the way the branch had been run, and I had no intention of making any kind of change in the external administration. What was factually given should be preserved.

It was our endeavor to operate within the framework and to throw what we had to give into the framework of the Theosophical movement. That was our endeavor. The basic prerequisite for Fräulein von Sivers to take over the management of the various agencies of the Theosophical Society in Berlin was that complete trust prevailed. Without this trust, nothing can be done in the practical part of the Theosophical movement. Trust in the practical part of the movement itself is necessary. The administration is a kind of appendage. Since we could not engage in any particular pedantry, it was natural that we expected complete trust in what is the basic requirement for working together in the theosophical field. This trust does not appear to have been given to the extent that we would need it to conduct the business calmly and objectively. We will only make the final point by linking it to the meeting two weeks ago and contrasting it with it. This meeting was based on things that were even referred to as gossip; they were based on public appearances. Everything is to be discussed in public. The fact that there is dissatisfaction was admitted in the meeting, and the expression of a mood of discontent is in itself enough to bring about such a step as is to be taken today. I am - let this be accepted as an absolutely true interpretation - I am, not only because every occultist is, but on much more esoteric principles, opposed to all aggression. Every act of aggression hinders the activity that I would be able to unfold. Please regard this step as something that merely follows from the principle of not acting aggressively. Everyone must behave in such a way that the wishes of all can be fully expressed. Everyone must suppress their personal desires so that our work can be done. Otherwise, the Berlin branch cannot be managed as desired. That is what I would like to achieve. When opposing views are expressed, it is impossible to work together.

If we work in such a way, as desired from various sides, then in my opinion we would flatten the Theosophical movement, we would reduce it to the level of a club.

The words that were spoken at the last meeting must be heard, the words: that I am in diametrical opposition to those who want a club-like community. I do not intend to attack anyone. I just cannot be there. Anyone who considers this properly will have to say that this is the absence of any aggressiveness. I would like to set the tone for this matter. This is what I emphasized at the general assembly in October, where I emphasized that I do not conform to such a form, that I cannot conform to a club-like society. Those who wish that the Berlin branch be administered differently, that the members interact with each other in a different way, must act accordingly. It is necessary for them to take matters into their own hands and carry them out for themselves, so that it seems self-evident that no one can object if their wishes are fulfilled in the manner mentioned. I could not fulfill these wishes. I have always tried to satisfy wishes as best I could. In order for the Theosophical Society to continue to develop peacefully, I have to take this step. I have the task of maintaining the continuity of the movement in Germany. It is clear to me that only on an occult basis – given our confused circumstances in the world – can this movement be taken forward. A movement on a social basis does not need to be Theosophical; its people may already have ideal aspirations and become dear to one another, and that does not need to be Theosophical. But we need a theosophical movement, and that is why I cannot be a leader in a club-like organization. Please understand that I am obliged to bring the full depth of the theosophical movement, which is based on occultism, to it. Today, only those who live by the Aristotelian principle are truly called to actively participate within the Theosophical Society: Those who seek truth must respect no opinion.

Perhaps I would also like to work in a different way. But here it is a matter of duty, and therefore I will take this step because I have this obligation to build the Theosophical movement on a truly deeper foundation, and in the process of building, any attempt to run the society in a club-like manner will lead to a flattening out. No one can better understand that such things are necessary for some, and no one's relationship with me should change. Everyone will always be welcome with me. I will continue to conduct the business that relates to the material aspects of Theosophy in the same way, so that in the future everything can be found as it has been found. But precisely for this reason I must withdraw.

The consistency is, of course, in the lines that I have executed. I cannot and must not lose sight of the theosophical movement at any point. That is why I have asked those members of our Theosophical Society – all the other organizations are of a secondary nature – individual members of the Theosophical Society, to hold a meeting with me and asked them whether they would be willing to continue the Theosophical movement with me in the way I have led it, against which a discord has arisen and dissatisfaction has been expressed. This had to be so, because I must maintain continuity. I will only mention the case I have in Munich. There is a strictly closed lodge there that only accepts those who meet the requirements of the whole. But now we will have a second lodge in which all others can be admitted. I have endeavored to draw attention to the conditions of the work of the lodges, which is the daily bread of a lodge. I also want to found a Besant Lodge soon, for whose name I will ask Annie Besant for permission soon. In addition, there will be completely free activity from which no one can be excluded. That is the reason for my resignation.

(The names of a number of members are then listed.)

Krojanker: “After these explanations from Dr. Steiner, those who were unable to attend the last meeting will have gained an insight into the cause of the discord and also the background to the matter, which led three members of the board to take the above-mentioned step. There must have been trouble brewing long before those involved knew anything about it. Since I have known about these things, it has been impossible for me to get over them. At first it was impossible for me to realize that these things could drive the gentlemen to this conclusion. What was it actually? The starting point for me was simply the decision of City Councillor Eberty and Miss Schwiebs, who had set out to see the members in their home for free, informal discussions. It was not foreseeable that such conclusions could be drawn from this. The suggestion came from Miss von Sivers; members should be encouraged to approach each other, and the feeling should not arise that one does not quite feel at home, so that everything rushes home immediately after the lecture. But even with Miss von Sivers, this was noticeable to a certain extent. As long as we had no headquarters, she had to help herself in a different way, visiting friends and talking to them. These are things that were purely personal and private in nature, and in the previous session I had hoped that they would not affect us. I still have the same opinion of these things today, the opinion that they must not be touched. The polite couple who had invited us were not yet part of the branch. A distinction must be made between association work, associationism and theosophical work. But committees are not formed and elected, and members of the board are not elected, for nothing, so that they do not have to worry about running the association. They are elected and will then also have the authority to speak about business matters and to allow themselves to make judgments from time to time. If autocratic management [...] is desired, then statutes and so on would not be necessary either. If Dr. Steiner had said at the time: We must renounce such a form, had he shown or said, only under such and such conditions is it possible for me to work and participate, then things would have happened immediately and quite naturally. Those who would have liked it would have gone along with it, and the rest would have stayed out. I don't understand why a whole business apparatus has been set up and why it is resented if, as a member of one of its branches, I take an interest in it. I think it cannot be considered a crime to inquire about these things. I would recommend the introduction of wish lists. I must protest against the accusation that we are aggressive. We have heard Dr. Steiner speak for two years about what Theosophy is and what Theosophical life entails. Surely other ways could have been found to steer the discussions in a different direction. But now that it has come to this, the consequences must be drawn under all circumstances. I imagine them to be – I don't know if I have understood correctly – that this Berlin branch continues to exist as a continuation of the Berlin branch of the German Theosophical Society, and that the three board members and the other gentlemen whom Dr. Steiner has read out are now founding a new lodge.

Further negotiations and consultations will be needed before this step can be taken. The first task will be to elect a committee, because the Berlin branch currently has neither a committee nor a leadership. We will therefore have to form a provisional committee to discuss how this is to be done. I would like to leave it up to you to make proposals in this regard. In any case, we deeply regret the way in which the matter has been handled so far. When Dr. Steiner speaks of discord and soul currents, there is in fact nothing that I know and perhaps some personal matters that must never be made the business of the Berlin branch."

Dr. Steiner: “I myself had good reason to take the personal into account. At the general assembly, 300 marks were approved for my work last year. I had already raised concerns at the time, but soon after that I felt compelled to put these 300 marks back into the treasury because of the prevailing mood, because I did not want to work on the basis of ill will. You see that I have kept quiet for long enough. 'I also wanted to let this matter pass quietly, to bridge the gap with positive work. In the long run, this was not possible for good reason. Of course, we are not discussing private matters here, nor is a conversation about professional life appropriate. I have said that, as far as I am concerned, what was requested has been largely satisfied. The wish had arisen that we should have lectures elsewhere than here or in the architects' house, and I agreed to give lectures at Wilhelmstraße 118 as well. But now we have to make a few comments about such a matter. The things are not as crude as they might initially appear, but are more subtly connected. At the time, I readily agreed to fulfill this wish, and in the pursuit of this matter, I asked to form an executive committee. I did not dream what came of it. We still have no branch in the north, south, or east. It was my intention to work not only in the west, but in all parts of the city. When an executive committee was formed in the Berlin branch, it was intended that this committee should take charge of the actual agitation. No one here has ever been prevented from taking care of business matters, but the view is that anyone who wants to do something has to create the space for themselves. No one could demand anything from us. If someone had come to us with positive suggestions, we would have taken them up. But when it is said that our activities have not been attacked, I say that only this week I received a written accusation that we are managing the library in such a way that one can threaten to go to court about it. We cannot accept hidden accusations. We will also hand over the library. When I have presented these things, you can assume that they are based on the firmest possible foundation. The statutes and so on could have been adhered to if there had been goodwill. When one talks about business, it must be practical. What was done at the time was impractical. I spoke three times in relatively beautiful rooms, but then in a room that was referred to as a stable, and finally in a room where speaking was almost impossible. I had to speak with glasses knocking behind me and so on. That was no atmosphere for Theosophy. I had to think of doing things in a practical way. This was the reason for my decision to hold the lectures in the architect's house. Such measures were in favor of the Berlin branch. Nevertheless, I was told: These lectures are ones that we can attend or not attend. - So you see that this is a silent discourtesy. Nothing has been done precisely because the other view of business matters, of statutes and committees, gave the opportunity to try out how it works. A letter from a theosophist reads: “I would like to see the Berlin branch work well for once. Most of all, I would be pleased if it could work in a favorable way.“ But then a wish list has also been worked out, you think - on the wish list it said: ‘The chairman has to be there half an hour before the start’ - that's what made the step so special.” Ms. Eberty: “Don't you think this fragmentation is very sad?”

Dr. Steiner: “I have worked against these things. Whether a fragmentation will result from it remains to be seen. If the members of the Berlin branch will understand how to act in a theosophical way, there will be no need for fragmentation at all. There is no need to speak of fragmentation, I will do nothing to promote it.”

Mrs. Eberty: “If you had had something against the meetings, it would have been enough to say: There are reasons why the meetings cannot take place. We had the best intentions for this. We only did it to serve the cause of Theosophy. It did not even remotely occur to us that this was against your intentions, not even when it was on the agenda eight days ago, when there were indications that our afternoon could be meant by it."

Dr. Steiner: “If the form is dropped, there is no objection to the private meetings. What has happened at my request? That the teas at Fräulein von Sivers's have been abolished because I have not seen any benefit for Theosophy in such tea meetings. It was difficult for me that Countess Brockdorff took it badly. But nevertheless, I just said it. We ourselves would not be able to manage things differently.

Krojanker: “It seems that the Executive Committee is being made the scapegoat. If you are on the Executive Committee, useful work is only possible if you are informed about the entire business situation. If you don't have insight and don't find opportunities to gain insight, what do you want to make suggestions for? The Executive Committee needs this knowledge because it has to report to the Board. I am increasingly lacking tangible documents that have given rise to these matters.

Now comes the library question. A library commission has been set up. It is not really understandable why the members of the branch should be held responsible for this.

Mr. Werner: “Dr. Steiner is a man called from a higher place. Now it is difficult to get what is needed to perfect us. If you approach him now with demands and questions, such as, ”Where did you leave the money you raised with your lectures? Give us information about what you got out of these lectures! Give us information about where the money has gone. If you say, 'We decide here, because we have a completely free hand to say what you have to do', then that is not the way to harmonious cooperation. I think that when you first accept teachings and instructions from someone, the demands and questions should not go so far that they are unbearable in detail. These would be thoughts that shun the light and lead to disharmony. But we can prevent disharmony if we want to. If that is not the case, then we have no right to come here and quibble about what has happened.

Krojanker: “A distinction must be made between the theosophical teaching and the leadership of the Berlin branch. This will make it possible to avoid any mistrust.”

Dr. Steiner: “The harmony may have to be bought at the expense of excluding some members. The arranged lectures were intended for the Berlin branch. It is true that we could not have done the work better. I am of the opinion that for the time being we have done the work as well as we could, since nothing better has been offered to us from the other side. At the moment something better would have been offered to us from the other side, we would not have ignored it. But what we have done, I consider to be the best so far.

Fränkel: “Two meetings have been convened that have caused the discord. On both occasions, accusations have been made, followed by disharmony, so that a club has been formed, as it were, and we consist of two classes of members, so to speak. There are two ways of proceeding. There is a civil case and a criminal case. This is a public matter, not a private one. The complaint should therefore be made. However, it is not clear what is actually at issue. The first point is the tea with the ladies, the second point is that only the business committee has taken the wrong measures. The error seems to lie in the fact that at the founding, there was no discussion about how the business of the committee should be handled. There is no real discord yet, only the complaint of a few gentlemen based on factual reasons.

Dr. Steiner: “If we had come to accuse anyone, then you could blame us for something. We are returning the management to those who have a wish list. The way of thinking expressed in the wish list is such that it cannot lead to anything in the Theosophical Society.”

Krojanker: “A desire for power emerges from those who perhaps believe they are superior. But I have heard from Dr. Steiner that Theosophy does not submit to any authority.”

Tessmar: “It is all much too materialistic. We are members of the Theosophical Society, but the whole Berlin branch can go home if Dr. Steiner says, ‘I will no longer give lectures here.’ Dr. Steiner gives Theosophical lectures, not lectures about speakers. I myself do not want to be held accountable; I want to hear Theosophical lectures in order to progress. And now the complaint about authority comes up. The theosophical lectures are authority for me. I show trust by not asking: What does the library do, what do the six Dreier do, who come in?"

Krojanker: “I now see where the debate is leading us today. We have to come to terms with the facts. From Dr. Steiner's reply, I see that he is not to be convinced in any way, and that perhaps only time can bring understanding of the individual things. We are faced with the fact that this separation is taking place. What must happen now? Perhaps we should devote another hour to this question.”

(A motion is made to end the debate, which is carried.)

(Dr. Steiner, Fräulein von Sivers and Mr. Kiem resign.)

Dr. Steiner: “My only remaining duty is to recommend that a managing director be elected for the time being. The process will be as follows: The managing director will have the task of informing the other members of the resignation. I myself will also inform the external members that I have resigned on my part.” Krojanker: ‘Can't a general statement be communicated to the members from both sides about what has happened here?’

(A number of members declare their resignation from the Berlin branch.

Krojanker: Asks what he has done wrong and is told that he disagrees with the management.

Dr. Steiner: “Why did I do it in general? It is done this way because it could not be done any other way. The Berlin branch can now experiment and so on, and do its own things.

Mrs. Eberty: “We all received invitations.”

Dr. Steiner: “I invited some with my name and with a personal greeting. But the list is not complete.”

Mrs. [Johannesson]: “We felt separated by the tone of your address. We felt as if you had carried out a separation.”

Ms. [Voigt]: “Could the ladies be asked which topic was discussed? And also about the question from which Mr. Fränkel started. It is perhaps of interest.”

Tessmar: “I belong to Dr. Steiner. I will not be influenced. Please make a note of that if necessary. I really feel offended. As a seasoned seaman, I would choose different words. I forbid personal tapping.”

Dr. Steiner: “It has therefore been decided that a manager must be appointed for the German Theosophical Society. It would have been impossible for me to continue my work without taking this step. I cannot give intimate lectures in this mood. I only had the choice of either leaving Berlin or taking this step. Maintaining continuity was the reason for this. Mrs. Annie Besant said, when she saw the current here, that I should go to Munich, where the work that Miss von Sivers has done can be continued. But I will not change my whole relationship into a mere point. It is precisely the outward appearance that is at issue here, not the inwardness.

Present were: about 30 members. The meeting ended at eight o'clock [in the evening].